Appeal No. 1998-0097
Application No. 08/513,036
artisan with ordinary skill in the absence of hindsight
guidance provided by the subject application disclosure. Even
disregarding this concern, the rejection still would be
improper. This is because the Examiner's obviousness
conclusion in this rejection includes the previously discussed
proposition that the artisan would have found it obvious to
optimize the arsine gas partial pressure teaching of Heyen to
thereby result in values within the here claimed range. This
proposition is not well founded for the reasons fully
discussed previously. In re Sebek, id.
It follows that we also cannot sustain the Examiner's §
103 rejection of all appealed claims as being unpatentable
over
Van NT Blik in view of Menigaux and Heyen.
The decision of the Examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
BRADLEY R. GARRIS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007